THE WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL. 



No. 19. 



WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL. 



A. O. U. No. 522. Loxia leucoptera (Gmel.). 



Description. — Male: Rosy-red or carmine all over, save for grayish of 

 nape and black of scapulars, wings, and tail. The black of scapulars sometimes 

 meets on lower back. Two conspicuous white wing-bars are formed by the tips 

 of the middle and greater coverts. Bill slenderer and weaker than in preceding 

 species. Female and young : Light olive-yellow, ochraceous, or even pale 

 orange over gray, clearer on rump, duller on throat and belly ; most of the feathers 

 with dusky centers, finer on crown and throat, broader on back and breast ; wings 

 and tail as in male, but fuscous rather than black; feather-edgings olivaceous. 

 Very variable. Length 6.00-6.50 (152.4-165.1) ; wing 3.50 (88.9); tail 2.25 

 (57:2) : bill .67 (17.). 



Recognition Marks. — Sparrow size; crossed bill; conspicuous white wing- 

 bars of both sexes. 



Nesting. — Not known to breed in Ohio. "Nest, of twigs and strips of birch- 

 bark, covered exteriorly with moss ( Usnea) and lined with soft moss and hair, 

 on the fork of an evergreen, in deep forests. Eggs, 3( ?), pale blue, spotted and 

 streaked near larger end with reddish brown and lilac, .80 x .55 (20.3 x 14.)" 

 (Chamberlain). 



General Range. — Northern parts of North America, south into the United 

 States in winter. Breeds from northern New England northward. 



Range in Ohio. — Of casual occurrence during migrations and in winter. 



THE habits of this lesser known species appear to be substantially the 

 same as those of L. c. minor. Its summer range lies for the most part further 

 north, altho it also breeds in the mountains of the West. It is much less frequent 

 in winter than the preceding species, altho it occasionally appears in great 

 numbers. 



"In the spring of 1869, Mr. Jillson, of Hudson, Mass., sent me a pair of 

 these birds which he had captured the preceding autumn. They were very 

 tame, and exceedingly interesting little pets. Their movements in the cage were 

 like those of caged Parrots in every respect, except that they were far nn ire 

 easy and rapid. They clung to the sides and upper wires of the cage with their 

 feet, hung down from them and seemed to enjoy the practice of walking with 

 their heads downward. They were in full song and both the male and the 

 female were quite good singers. Their songs were irregular and varied, but 

 sweet and musical. They ate almost every kind of fond, but were especially 

 eager for slices of raw apples. An occasional larch cone was also a great treat 

 to them. Altho while they lived they were continually bickering over their 

 foi <1. \et when the female was accidentally choked by a bit of eggshell, her mate 

 was inconsolable, ceased to sing, refused his food, and died of grief in a very 

 few days" (Brewer). 



